ontology and change, fyi (01)
[apologies if you receive multiple copies] (02)
CALL FOR PAPERS (03)
===========================================
Journal of Logic and Computation
Special Issue on Ontology Dynamics
=========================================== (04)
Description
-----------
Recently, there has been a growing interest in encoding human knowledge
using ontologies represented under some formal representation language.
Simply creating an ontology is not enough though; ontologies, just like any
structure holding knowledge, need to be updated as well. There are several
reasons why an ontology should change: changes could be initiated because of
a change in the world being modeled; the users' needs may change, requiring
a different conceptualization; knowledge previously unknown, classified or
otherwise unavailable may become known; or a design flaw may have been
noticed in the original conceptualization. (05)
In all these cases, the representation of our knowledge in the ontology
should be modified so as to form a more accurate or adequate
conceptualization of the domain. Such a modification presents several
difficulties from both the practical and the theoretical point of view, as
it is not always clear what the expected, or desired, result of any
particular modification should be, nor how such a result can be determined. (06)
This special issue intends to publish articles related to the field of
ontology dynamics, in order to discuss and analyze important
characteristics, open research issues and recent research developments on
the field. We are interested in advances in the field of ontology evolution,
which is the main research area dealing with ontology dynamics, as well as
in works that are directly or indirectly related to the problem. Both
theoretical research work as well as works describing implemented systems or
tools are welcome. It is targeted to anyone (from academia or industry)
working on ontology evolution or related fields, as well as to people
designing, supporting, or using ontologies that are subject to change. (07)
Topics of Interest
------------------
We encourage submissions on all topics related to ontology dynamics,
including original theoretical work on the issues involved directly or
indirectly with change as well as applications or implemented systems
related to such issues. We are particularly (but not exclusively) interested
in the following topics:
- Ontology evolution and versioning
- Foundations and formal aspects of ontology dynamics
- Extensions to ontology languages to better support change
- Belief revision for ontologies
- Inconsistency handling in evolving ontologies
- Change propagation in ontologies and metadata
- Ontologies for dynamic environments
- Dynamic knowledge construction and exploitation
- Case studies, software tools, use cases, applications (08)
Important Dates
---------------
Submission deadline: October 31, 2007
Acceptance notification: January 31, 2008
Revised Version deadline: March 31, 2008
Final Decision: May 30, 2008 (09)
Method of Submission
--------------------
Only electronic submissions will be considered. All submissions should be
sent by email to Giorgos Flouris (fgeo@xxxxxxxxxxxx) in pdf format.
Submitted articles should follow the general formatting guidelines of the
Journal of Logic and Computation (see:
http://www.oxfordjournals.org/logcom/for_authors/index.html). (010)
Guest Editors
-------------
Giorgos Flouris, FORTH (fgeo@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Mathieu d'Aquin, The Open University (M.Daquin@xxxxxxxxxx)
Grigoris Antoniou, FORTH (antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Jeff Z. Pan, University of Aberdeen (jpan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Dimitris Plexousakis, FORTH (dp@xxxxxxxxxxxx) (011)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Aug 16, 2007 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Model or Reality
To: edbark@xxxxxxxx, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (012)
> So bridges stand because we have a certain amount of useful "knowledge" and
> they fail because we are not omniscient. (013)
They also fail when our models do not accommodate for interaction and
change and the immensity of external factors that, in the real world,
play such a big role. (014)
Predicting change can only be done with limited expectation, however
it is wise to
have an 'x' factor in our equations (uncertainty) and design for some
preventive failover mechanism, instead of assuming that our models
because they are so 'finite' are perfect (015)
The stability factor in a model can only be a temporary , and must be
balanced with the 'uncertainty' factors at application stage (016)
PDM (017)
>
> When we build ontologies for public use, we have a responsibility to codify
> the knowledge that has been validated by theory and experiment, and to label
> that knowledge as such. It may not be "truth", but it represents a level of
> comprehension of our world that human experts accept and use, and we can
> hardly do better than that. Ontological engineering is not epistemology, and
> it is not metaphysics. But we do need a means of separating the "good" models
> (that generally produce results that can be validated by experiment) from the
> "bad" ones (that often produce nonsense).
>
> Finally, the bridge-building example teaches us that no ontology or
> combination of ontologies, no matter how well-founded, can be guaranteed to be
> *sufficient* for any given task. What you don't know can *always* hurt you.
>
> -Ed
>
> P.S. The World Trade Center is another example of the success of accepted
> knowledge and the disaster from the missing information. The impact of a
> jetliner at 480 knots did not bring down the twin towers -- one of the
> buildings swung 6 degrees off of vertical from the impact, but because it had
> been built to withstand earthquakes and hurricanes, it swung back to upright!
> What brought the towers down was the fact that the particle wind from the
> disintegrated aircraft stripped the heat insulation off the lateral supports,
> and the heat from the slow-burning office furniture then weakened the supports
> -- a combination of bizarre factors for which we only made the predictive
> model after the fact.
>
> --
> Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694
>
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
> and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> (018)
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
********************************************* (019)
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
********************************************* (020)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (021)
|